Dynamic Thought
OR
THE LAW OF VIBRANT
ENERGY
BY
WILLIAM WALKER ATKINSON
Author of "Thought Force;" "Law of the New Thought;" "Nuggets of
the New Thought;" "Memory Culture" and other Scientific and
Occult Works. Associate Editor of "Suggestion," 1900-01;
Editor of "New Thought," 1901-05; Co-Editor
of "The Segnogram," 1906.
"I am attacked by two very opposite sects—the Scientists and the Know-Nothings;both laugh at me, calling me the 'Frogs' Dancing Master,' but Iknow that I have discovered one of the greatest Forces in Nature."—Galvini.
1906
THE SEGNOGRAM PUBLISHING COMPANY
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
Copyright 1906
By The Segnogram Publishing Company
Notice.—This book is protected by Copyright, and simultaneousinitial publication in the United States of America, Canada,Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and other countries. Allrights reserved.
A FOREWORD
This is a queer book. It is a marriage ofthe Ancient Occult Teachings to the latest andmost advanced conceptions of Modern Science—anodd union, for the parties thereto are ofentirely different temperaments. The marriagemight be expected to result disastrously,were it not for the fact that a connecting linkhas been found that gives them a bond of commoninterest. No two people may truly loveeach other, unless they also love something incommon—the more they love in common, thegreater will be their love for each other. And,let us trust that this will prove true in this marriageof Occultism and Science, celebrated inthis book.
The Occultists usually get at the "facts,"first, but they manage to evolve such outrageoustheories to explain the facts, that theworld will have none of their wares, and turnsto Science for something "reasonable." Science,proceeding along different lines, at firstdenies these "facts" of the Occultists, not findingthem accounted for by any of her existing[Pg 4]theories; but, later on, when the "facts" havebeen finally thrust under her eyes, after repeatedattempts and failures, she says, "Oh,yes, of course!" and proceeds to evolve a newtheory, welding it with other scientific hypotheses,and after attaching a new label thereto,she proudly exhibits the thing as "the latestdiscovery of Modern Science"—and smiles indulgently,or indignantly, when the theory ofthe old Occultists is mentioned, saying, "Quitea different thing, we assure you!" And yet,in all justice, be it said, Science usually proceedsto find much better "proofs" to fit the"facts" of Occultism, than did the Occultiststhemselves. The Occultist "sees things," butis a poor hand at "proofs"—while the Scientistis great on "proofs," but so often, and solong, fails to see many things patent to the Occultistwho is able to "look within" himself,but who is then unable to positively and scientifically"prove" the facts. This is easily explained—theOccultist's information comesfrom "within," while the Scientist's comesfrom without—and "proofs" belong to the"without" side of Mentation. And this is whythe Occultists s